Ratios are stupid
Ratios are stupid
What happens when you prioritize 'followers' over 'following?'
Welcome to Gen Z Translator, where I break down trending topics on Fridays. If you’re new, you can subscribe here and follow me on Threads or X. Views are my own. Happy reading!
When I was in high school, how many Instagram followers you had could denote your status as a “popular kid.”
Specifically, this metric was based on whether your number of Instagram followers was greater than the number of accounts you were following. This concept is sometimes referred to as your “ratio.” For example, you could follow 158 people but have 200 followers, which would be considered a “good ratio,” since you’re followed more than you follow.
It showed desirability (you were cool because a lot of people wanted to follow you) and exclusivity (you only follow other people who are also cool).
Then, you could progress further into someone’s inner circle with Close Friends stories1 and finsta2 accounts, where you gained access to insider information people on the “outs” didn’t get to see. This could happen between best friends or between people who had barely met. The latter concept is where certain terms like “moots” and “OOMFs” come from.
“Mutual followers” (“moots” for short) is the term for someone you follow, but either have never met or don’t know well. “OOMFS” is another way to refer to mutuals, standing for “one of my friends/one of my followers.”
As a teenager, I spent more time than I care to admit worrying about who was following me, who I was following, and who was trustworthy enough to be let into my inner circle. Nowadays, you can see on Instagram straight up who isn’t following you back, but it didn’t used to be that easy. It was common behavior in my area to monitor who followed and unfollowed you with a separate app, watching and analyzing your ratio in real time.
An unfollow could declare unspoken beef. The lack of a follow back could show whether you were en vogue. Access to a private story granted friendship status between two acquaintances. Information leaving that circle led to lost trust. Inside jokes were shared (#IYKYK.3) Rumors would spread about people buying their followers.
Ratios serve as a social currency.
Think about your favorite influencers. They’re followed more than they’re following…and it has to be that way. First of all, there’s no way someone like Selena Gomez is going to go follow 424 million people. Second, the nature of online celebrity culture requires a platform – a big one – and with that comes exclusivity with who gets to be on the other side of the curtain. “Good ratios” are what get you brand deals, internet celebrity, and clout.4
This can branch into “closed DMs” versus “open DMs,” where only followers are allowed to direct message someone, rather than anyone on the internet. Once you get to a certain number, subjective to you, keeping up with every comment, every DM, and every follower becomes unsustainable. Privacy can become a concern, too.
I’ve been thinking about the emotional chokehold this kind of online interaction can have on its everyday users. It can induce feelings of insecurity or lead to overthinking. Social media has played a huge part in the rise of mental health problems among people my age, according to The Atlantic.
The reality of why someone didn’t follow you back or didn’t let you follow them can be complex. Maybe they don’t check their “follower” notifications or missed the notif. Maybe they have boundaries around adding acquaintances. Or, maybe you’re right, and they don’t like you. (Oof. Sorry.)
That’s the magic of the internet. You can’t see the other side of the screen, so you can’t know.
Nowadays, I’d call ratios vanity metrics. Hootsuite defines that as “a social media metric that looks impressive at a glance but doesn’t necessarily indicate a company’s overall success in reaching its goals.”
What does someone’s following actually say about them? They’re good at entertaining the internet? They have a service to offer? Or have they just found a way to capitalize on their online presence, which also inflates their reputation?
Algorithms have gotten tougher to game. It’s well known X/Twitter is on the down and outs. It’s harder to get seen and harder to see the right thing. Meanwhile, Instagram has tried to de-emphasize likes (which were viewed similarly to ratios) by allowing you to hide them, decreasing the popularity competition between users.
In new updates, Meta is further distinguishing between online groups. Users will be able to post reels to non-followers only. You’ll be able to send post previews to Instagram friends. And, “you can now comment on people’s stories, only your followers can see the comments, and people who follow you back can leave a comment.”
Personally, I don’t see the problem with following acquaintances back. I find it can be one of the easiest ways to discover how much you do have in common with someone, which can then lead to a better connection down the road. Plus, sometimes you just want to keep tabs on someone. No shame in that. (Okay, sometimes there’s shame in that).
A follow can help someone with a smaller social presence out, indicating approval or credibility. A repost can help amplify important causes or bring attention to under-covered issues. You might learn something new about someone or something.
There are people on the other side of the argument who think the “acquaintances-to-Instagram-friends” phenomenon is out of hand. This X user wrote, “the epidemic of meeting someone one time and then following each other on instagram has got to stop. i can’t keep living like this I DONT KNOW YOU.”
The comments got a bit heated. Someone replied, “fake networkers when real friendmakers come at them…….”
Another said, “if i enjoy meeting someone enough during a quick first encounter, then by all means i will add them on social media… no i do not ‘know’ them like that, but its the only way to sustain and welcome connection in case our paths cross again... and this has only every benefitted me.”
Here’s the deal. If you don’t want to follow acquaintances, don’t. If you follow someone and find you don’t enjoy their digital presence, you can always remove them. But not following someone back just to maintain your ratio? Not cool.
Read my last story: Five times social media went too far
My weekly roundup:
🎶 What I’m Listening To: “Zombie” by The Cranberries
🎞️ What I’m Watching: Tell Me Lies
🔎 What I’m Reading: “Refuse to Be Done” by Matt Bell
⚠️ What’s On My Radar: In an interview, Chappell Roan said in her industry, “you flourish if you don’t protect yourself.”
Read the full Gen Z Dictionary here.
Close Friends stories: Social media stories only specified people can see, as opposed to public stories
Finsta: “Fake Instagram” account, also known as a spam or private account where users post more casual content than they would on their main account
#IYKYK: “if you know you know,” a hashtag often used to circumvent explanation to people who aren’t in on the post
Clout: “influence or power,” according to the Oxford Dictionary